There are a multitude of reasons errors
occur. Below we discuss the origins of
many errors researchers have encountered
over the years. Some will be quite obvious
to the reader, while others are somewhat
obscure.

For details on common errors contained in many
popular almanacs, encyclopedias, and other
reference books, visit reference book errors.

Abbreviations

A common origin of research errors is the
misinterpretation of U.S. Postal Service state
abbreviations. Contrary to what some writer/researchers
have reported, MI is not Minnesota, Mississippi,
or Missouri; MO is not Montana, and AL is not
Alaska! In nearly every case that Internet Accuracy
Project has documented, the erroneous state data has
continued to spread unchecked, creating a nightmare
for future researchers.

This is one of the reasons we avoid the use of
state abbreviations in entries within our
common errors database.

The use and misinterpretation of other
abbreviations, is yet another common source
of errors. The fact that abbreviations
often have different meanings in different
parts of the world, provides further
incentive to avoid their use on documents
and in reference materials, whenever possible.

Blind acceptance of spell check corrections

With society's increasing reliance on
spell checkers, there has been a
noticeable escalation in the number of
errors rooted in the blind acceptance of
spell check corrections. Far too many
people blindly accept correction from
their spell check software while failing
to recognize that they must differentiate
between similar words. With homonyms, since
both examples are valid words, your spell
checker will not pick up the mistake.

In other cases, the "error" your spell
checker has uncovered, may not be an error
at all. They are particularly vulnerable
to falsely correcting the spelling of some
names, and towns. Many of the error corrections
you'll find on this site are the result of
a researcher blindly accepting an erroneous
correction made by their spell checker
regarding the spelling of a person's name,
or the town of their birth or death.

Data entry errors

Anyone who's spent much time on a computer
or typewriter has likely reversed numbers
or letters while entering data. We're all
human, so even in professional settings
these mistakes regularly occur. While these
errors are normally caught before publication,
most major publishing houses have still
managed to let simple typographical errors
slip through on a regular basis. Typographical
errors in novels are certainly a distraction
and an irritant to the reader. But consider
for a moment all those individuals who rely
on reference books, almanacs, encyclopedias
and other non-fiction works in their daily
work. Unlike a publishing mistake found in
a novel, errors found in almanacs,
textbooks and reference books have a costly
effect on the businesses, students, researchers
and other individuals who rely on their
accuracy.

Differing reference book formats

The source of a wide variety of errors is
rooted in ambiguous and contradictory formats
used to present data. Formats used to present
information in almanacs, encyclopedias and
other reference books, vary to such a degree
that errors are sometimes introduced by
researchers who misinterpret the data because
of differing presentation of the info.

The following example pertains to actor
Hume Cronyn.
As a result of his name being listed as
"Hume (Blake) Cronyn" in one reference book,
a researcher erroneously surmised that Blake
was his real last name. This is somewhat
understandable since some books place a
person's maiden, or original name at birth,
within parentheses or brackets between their
first and last name, while others use the
same method to indicate an individual's
middle name. Consequently, you can now find
multiple sources that incorrectly report
"Blake" as Hume Cronyn's last name at birth.

Differing numeric date formats

Another common origin of errors is the reversal of
dates and months as a result of an all-numeric date
format. A great deal of confusion arises when
numbers are used to represent the day, month and
year, especially when the numbers representing
them are 12 or under. This creates an ambiguity
of the true date being conveyed; making it
impossible to tell which format is being used.

Some view 6-11-54 as June 11th, 1954, while others
see it as November 6th, 1954. Likewise, 12-2-33
may be February 12th, 1933, or become December 2nd,
1933 depending on your country of origin.

Researchers who fail to take this into account tend
to perpetuate old errors, and sometimes create new
ones.

That is why numbers are never used to represent
months in entries within Internet Accuracy Project's
online library. Months of the year are spelled
out, and all dates are presented in a month, day, year
format (January 1st, 2000), which is used throughout
the site.

Old Style vs. New Style calendar format

Many factual discrepancies and inaccuracies
exist in certain reference books as a result
of a lack of uniformity in calendar format
used. Deviations of 10, 11, and 12 days are
not uncommon due to the reformation of the
calendar, which took place beginning in 1582.
Since precise dates are such an integral
facet of this site, further explanation
follows: By the 1500s, the Old Style (O.S.)
or Julian Calendar had begun to drift away
from the proper correspondence with the
seasons due to erroneous suppositions in
the initial calendar formulation. Recognizing
that this deviation would only worsen,
Pope Gregory XIII set about to devise a
more accurate system. With the assistance
of astronomers, the New Style (N.S.) or
Gregorian Calendar was introduced. To
correct the inaccuracies of the Julian
Calendar, the New Style Calendar designated
that Wednesday, October 4th, 1582 would be
followed by Thursday, October 15th, 1582.

The adoption of this new system was not
universally concurrent, with many nations
delaying its implementation several centuries.
The differential between the New and Old
Style calendars became 12 days in the 19th
century, and 13 days in the 20th century.

Discrepancies between dates appearing at
this site and other sources that took place
during this transition are normally the
result of differing calendar formats. The
overwhelming majority of dates at Internet
Accuracy Project are New Style, and those
that are not, are so designated.

Divorce dates

Many sources offer contradictory dates of
divorce because of a lack of uniformity in
what they feel constitutes a "divorce date."
For some individuals, a researcher may be
able to find as many as 5 or 6 different
reported divorce dates. This is usually due
to the fact some dates are actually the date
the divorce papers were filed. Others may be
the date the individuals separated, or
possibly the date of their initial divorce
court appearance. On a number of occasions,
when a celebrity has specifically addressed
their divorce in an interview or their
autobiography, the divorce date they've
reported turned out to be the date of their
initial separation, not the date the
divorce was actually final. When divorce
papers are filed in the latter part of the
year, the divorce is often not final until
the following year. This is how you end up
with differing years of divorce. Just as a
marriage is not complete until the bride
and groom are "pronounced" man and wife, a
divorce is not complete until the date it
is final.

Dates of divorce offered in profiles here
at Internet Accuracy Project are almost
always the date the divorce in question was
final.

Erroneous extrapolation of birth dates

One of the most common sources of inaccurate birth
data is the extrapolation of an individual's birth
year by simply subtracting the person's age from
the current year. This method of determining a
person's year of birth will only produce an accurate
result if that individual has already celebrated
their birthday in the current calendar year at the
time the calculation is made.

Example:
In 2006, former actress J. Madison Wright died
unexpectedly at the age of 21. A few sources thus
extrapolated her year of birth as "1985." The only
problem was, she died just a few days before her
22nd birthday. Consequently, if you're lacking that
key piece of information and use this method, the
end result will occasionally be faulty data.

Faulty source data

0

Even if you have access to a wide range
of marriage, census, military, court,
birth and death records, this doesn't
always guarantee one hundred percent
accuracy. These documents occasionally
have minor errors necessitating additional
corroborative research. Recognize that
all the research and data in the world
is of little use if your supportive
documentation is based upon flawed
original source information.

Handwriting

1

Anyone who's ever tried to decipher a doctor's
illegible handwriting on a prescription can
empathize with researchers struggling to
interpret the scrawl on an aged document.
Before the computer, typewriter and printing
press brought consistency to the written word,
handwriting was the primary method of documenting
most events in life. Public record keeping,
personal documents, and nearly all other means
of conveying detailed information, was thus
subject to easy misinterpretation that is
further exacerbated by a seemingly endless
variety of handwriting styles used throughout
history.

Identical place names

2

One might imagine that an increased knowledge
of geography would lead to fewer mistakes
involving place names. Incredibly, the opposite
is sometimes true, and can actually lead to
the creation of additional errors.

If a researcher has no idea where Grand Rapids
is, they'll be forced to do additional research
and will learn that there are towns/cities by
that name in several U.S. states -- including,
Michigan, Minnesota, and Ohio. Those with a
greater knowledge of geography can sometimes
make the erroneous assumption that the town
being referred to is Grand Rapids, Michigan,
since it is the most widely-recognized of
these.

Just about anyone with a rudimentary knowledge
of geography can tell you that Miami is
located in Florida. While that certainly
is true, there are also towns with that
same name in Indiana, Missouri, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, and Texas.

Most folks will correctly inform you
that Minneapolis and St. Paul are located
in Minnesota. This is another accurate
assertion, but fails to communicate the
fact that both Minneapolis and St. Paul
are also towns located in Kansas.

This is one of the most obvious sources of errors
around. Millions sit down every day to complete
homework or write a report with just a single
source of information at their fingertips. Even
the utilization of multiple sources doesn't
guarantee complete accuracy. This subject is
discussed on our home page, but bears repeating:
Far too many people use the number of hits
received from a simple Google search to determine
the validity of information. They theorize that
the greater the number of hits, the more accurate
the information must be. What they fail to take
into account is that many hits are simply the
same erroneous data repeated by different sources.
In many cases, this data may have originated from
the same original flawed source information.

Contrary to popular belief, the sum total of human
knowledge is not available on the free, searchable
Web. There are literally billions of pieces of useful
information hidden away in libraries and private
collections that have never appeared on the Net. Yet
many mistakenly believe that data must be in error
if a Web search returns little or nothing. Conversely,
a majority of sites or reference books reporting the
same data does not necessarily mean it's accurate.

Lies

4

An incredible number of errors can be traced
back to a simple, straightforward lie. Some
of the most respected individuals in the world
have been known to lie in an attempt to advance
or save their careers, curry favor, or out of
simple vanity.

The need for eternal youth is no more prevalent
than in the world of entertainment. Publicists,
managers, agents, and even the celebrities
themselves alter their ages (along with other
personal data) with alarming frequency. As
infuriating as these lies are for researchers,
the end result is "only" wasted time. But when
scientists falsify scientific research or entire
studies that are later published in top medical
journals, the end result can be far more devastating
than the above example.

In recent years, an increasing number of top
doctors and scientists have been caught fabricating
research data to obtain millions of dollars in
government grant money, or merely to enhance
their standing in the academic community. While
several of these cases have received significant
attention in the press, the prevalence of celebrities
lying about their age, or background, far exceeds
the number of scientific misconduct cases.

The problem for journalists and researchers
is exacerbated when there's little irrefutable
evidence that directly contradicts the questionable
assertion made by the individual in question.
Yet, to blindly accept all data contained in
government records, is to ignore the fact that
typographical errors exist even in census,
marriage, military, court, birth and death
records.

We're all familiar with the fact that public
figures sometimes lie in an attempt to preserve
the illusion of youth and vitality. While less
common, there are those who've claimed to be
older than they actually were in order
to enter military service, leave home, or to
work at venues requiring entertainers to be
of age.

Increasingly, executives at the upper echelons
of the corporate world have found themselves
in trouble with the law for lies made regarding
the health of the companies they manage. A tad
more benign are the escalating lies company
officials sometimes tell regarding their
education or business experience to speed
their advancement or help secure a desired
position within a company.

Manipulation of statistical data

5

Even if statistical data is 100 percent accurate,
a person or organization with a specific bias
or political agenda may still be able to manipulate
it.

Just because an increase in the divorce rate
coincides with an increase in the number of
television households, this does not mean
television is to blame for escalating divorce
rates. Yet, one could certainly present detailed
statistical data that would appear to support
such an assertion. Without altering factual
statistics in any way, it's entirely possible
to twist them in such a way as to support
widely divergent positions.

Method of data conveyance

6

The use of a telephone to convey detailed
information is prone to the introduction
of far more errors than the written word.
The receiver of the data will occasionally
make assumptions regarding spelling,
geography and other issues, allowing the
introduction of errors that did not
previously exist.

Over the years, poor eyesight has been
blamed for more than a few inaccuracies.
The majority of those who require the
use of reading glasses, or squint to read
small text, can attest to the ease with
which an error can be inadvertently
generated by misreading or misinterpreting
written data.

Misinterpretation of footnotes

7

The very item meant to clarify, illuminate and offer
source information to the reader, has actually been
the root cause of a few biographical errors.

Example:December 23, 1931[2]

Most readers will recognize the bracketed "2" as
a footnote likely offering source information for
the given date. But there have been cases where
an uninformed reader would confuse the above
footnote with alternative information (seeing
the date as either December 23, 1931 or 1932).
Thus, passing on to others, their erroneous belief
that there is uncertainty in the validity of the
year, when there is none.

This misinterpretation of footnotes is one of the
main reasons for our use of an asterisk (*), as
opposed to the more common bracketed superscript
numbers, to designate footnotes throughout the
Internet Accuracy Project site.

Publication date vs. actual date of event

8

Another common source of research errors
involves confusing the publication date of
an article, with the date the event being
covered actually occurred. On occasion, the
publication of an article, and the event it
covers, may actually take place on the same
day. But this is not always the case.

Our researchers have encountered many
cases where the root cause of an erroneous
date of death was the mistaken belief
that the publication date of an obituary
was the actual date of death.

If you find the above data useful, please
link to this page from your webpage, blog or
website.
Alternatively, consider recommending us to
your friends and colleagues. Thank you in
advance!